The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1887-06-25
the RIGHT OF PETITION.

the distinction between petitions
in the nature of persuasive appeal
and those presented as an ultima
tum, animadventing on the latter.
Undoubtedly there is great and
just distinction between the two
forms of petition, but both have
their legitimate place in movements
for constitutional redress only as
all history will show. The petition,
in the nature of an ultimatum has
its natural place later on in the
movement, and when the gravity
of the situation has increased. Mag
ma Charta was wrung from a guilty
king by just such demand. Says
the Historian "Within q few days of
the kings landing (after the battle
of Bouvines) the barons again met
at st. Edmundsbury and swore on
the High Altar to demand from him
if needful by force of arms, the OBJ
servance of Henry's charter and of
the confessor's law" Nurs-
ing wrath in his heart the tyrant
bowed to necessity and summoned
the barons to a conference at Run
nymede.
And the English people and we
their defendants obtained the char
ter of Liberties, because our sturdy
forefathers had the courage that
day to demand their rights and to
stake all for their good and the
good of those who should come after
them.
What ismore they made the king
for otherwise he would have given
nothing-they made him pledge that
he would "to no man sell or deny or
delay right or justice !" and says
the Historian as "it was not an easy
matter to provide means for the
control Of a king, whom no man
could trust, council of "a barons
was chosen from the general body Of
their order to enforce on John the
observance of the charter, with the
right of declaring war on the king
should its provisions be infringed."
This happened 672 years ago next
month, and it seems as if it was
hardly necessary in the 10th cen
tury when the rights of the people
have grown apace to define again
the true meaning and bounds of the
right of petition.
The Advertiser" would convey
the impression that the public was
about to demand without first asking.
Those who know the history of the
King since 1874 know better. And
first let me say that the right Of pc
tition is certainly not confined to a
body of men. individuals may petition
in writing and verbally. Think first
how many prominent men Of all
classes have argued and pied with
the King since 1874. Within few
weeks honest men have been to him
and pied with him. We all remem-
ber when the King and Mr.. Gibson
slapped the planters delegation in
the face when they respectfully ask
ed in 1882 for a removal of the pre-
sent Cabinet. Mr.. Gibson undoubt-
edly rejoiced in the insult those men
submitted to that day without
fully realizing that that days
work might come back on his
head some day. What body of men
felt that they could submit to any
such treatment again? Did not
every heart say that, when next we
60 1t must be in the way that faith
less men can only appreciate? When
the King sent message to the
Legislature, calling for retrench-
ment and pledging his support to it,
many who knew the man too well
would not put themselves in the
way of after ridicule and did not
join in the torch light procession
and personal thanks to the King.
Many others did, to find that it ap-
| parently was wanton prelude to
enlarged and premedilated en-
croachments on the public treasury
by the King and his followers.
The methods of redress must be
measured to the man we are dealing
with. There is no sense In direct
ing men to q method of redress
wholly inapplicable to the present
demands, simply because it was
used in some other constitutional
struggle. The method must appeal
to our common sense and there must
be some hope that the method is
adapted to and will attain the de-
sired end. Mr.. Gibson says if our
petitions are refused, 60 to the bal
lot box, from which, be it remem-
bered, he shut out many white men
last election, who, having the rcquiv
sites for naturalization were still re-
fused their necessary papers, in Or
der to cut them off from polling
their votes. What man of common
sense but knows that the very one
who tells us to go to the ballot box,
has himself hedged it around by
unconstitutional methods SO as to
make it impossible to use it as a
check on the King and the Ministry?
The principle of "taxation with
out representation" evolved out f
the American Revolution was but
family limited at in the English
chortar ~ c;oht, h,% tI,o r.o,,.os